The past month has been as convincing an argument as any that Georgia
officials should seriously consider ranked-choice balloting, better known
as "instant runoff" voting, as the electoral standard in
Georgia.

Ever since the Nov. 4 election left Georgians without a majority-vote
winner in the three-way contest for incumbent Republican Saxby Chambliss'
seat in the U.S. Senate, people across the state have been treated to a
barrage of more-heat-than-light television campaign ads and slick,
oversized mailers from Chambliss and Democratic challenger Jim
Martin.

Though the two were fraternity brothers at the University of Georgia,
their conduct has been anything but brotherly as they've scrapped to get
their supporters back to the polls for today's runoff election, and the
early voting period that preceded it. Voters have been caught in the
crosshairs of the monthlong media assault, a circumstance that likely has
any number of voters wondering whether either candidate truly deserves
their vote.

Voters are in this predicament because Georgia is the only state that
requires the winner of a general election to obtain a majority - 50
percent plus one vote - in balloting. When all the votes were counted for
the Nov. 4 general election, Chambliss had 49.8 percent of the vote, with
Martin claiming 46.8 percent. The remaining 3.4 percent of ballots went
to Libertarian candidate Allen Buckley.

Now, in addition to being subjected to the indignity that is the modern
political campaign ad for a month after the issue might have been
decided, Georgia taxpayers will be footing the bill for a runoff
election. Today's runoff in all likelihood will bring only a fraction of
people to the polls that the general election, featuring a history-making
presidential contest at the top of the ballot, brought out to
vote.

What that means is that, however today's balloting might turn out, a
smaller percentage of voters will make the ultimate decision on a U.S.
Senate seat. As state Rep. Austin Scott, R-Tifton, put it in comments
published in Monday's Atlanta Journal-Constitution that could have been
made on behalf of either candidate in today's runoff, "There is the
question of should 51 percent of 10 percent of the voters trump 49
percent of five times that number."

Instant-runoff voting is a way to ensure that mathematical conundrum
isn't part of the electoral process. Instant runoffs are already in place
for all voters - or at least some categories of voters such as those
serving overseas in the military - in a number of state and local
jurisdictions across the country.

While the specifics of such ranked-choice balloting vary, instant-runoff
voting basically asks voters to rank their choices among all candidates
running for a particular office. If no candidate achieves a majority in
initial balloting, the second choices on ballots cast for the candidate
getting the lowest number of votes are then counted.

Here's how such a scheme could have worked in Georgia's Nov. 4 election:
Because he received the lowest number of votes, elections officials would
have tallied the second choices on Libertarian Allen Buckley's ballots,
which would have been either Chambliss or Martin. With both Republican
Chambliss and Democrat Martin so close to achieving a majority vote, it's
likely that tallying the second choices on Buckley's ballots would have
produced a winner. That winner would have been determined without the
expense and aggravation of a runoff election, and would have represented
the clear will of a significant number of voters, rather than the will of
the relatively fewer voters casting runoff ballots.

There are, of course, any number of questions that should be answered
before any serious push for instant-runoff voting begins in Georgia, not
the least of which are whether it might be too confusing for some voters,
and whether it would present any problems for electronic voting machines
with regard to accurate tabulation and reporting. It's also important to
remember that, under the federal Voting Rights Act, any changes to the
electoral system in Georgia would have to pass federal scrutiny before
being implemented.

But if there is a chance that instant-runoff voting could ensure election
results would accurately reflect the preferences of a wide majority of
voters, and could engender more interest in general elections, it's an
idea worth exploring in Georgia's halls of government.